The Six-Day War Itself

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Six-Day War Itself The Six-Day War Source: Israel Government Yearbook5728 (1967-68), Central Office of information, Prime Minister’s Office, March 1968, pp. 17-25 On the morning of Monday, 5 June 1967, Arab aggression led to the outbreak of air and ground fighting between Israel and Egypt. Within a few hours, attacks by Jordan, Syria and Iraq turned the fighting into war between Israel and the Arab States, Algeria, Kuwait and Sudan included, for they, too, dispatched combat units which took part in it. Instantly, Israel aircraft delivered a lightning assault upon the Egyptian air force and wiped it out in three short hours, and, on that same first day, the other enemy air forces were either wiped out, too, or badly mauled. Our armor, parachutists and infantry broke through in Sinai and the Gaza Strip overran the heavily-fortified lines of Egypt after bitter engagements and, thrusting hard and swiftly westward and southward, smashed seven Egyptian divisions and their nearly a thousand tanks. All Sinai was in our hands, the sea-lane to Eilat was open once more, and our troops stood on the eastern bank of the Suez Canal. On the Jordanian front, our forces drove into Judaea and Samaria in a multi-axial attack, worsted the Arab Legion, and in less than three days had taken the entire area. Jerusalem, one and undivided, was freed. On the Syrian front, we stormed the Golan Heights for all its powerful defenses, its difficult terrain and an enemy that offered stout resistance until, at length, it was broken. Egypt lost all its aircraft and most of its army, and its navy was not unscathed. The air and land forces of Jordan and Syria were overwhelmed. Iraq’s contingent, except for air squadrons on air-field No. 3, never fought; its communications unit, posted in Jordan, was punished in a raid by Israel planes. So the war ended, with our aircraft in unchallenged superiority throughout, our soldiers established along advantageous lines at the Suez Canal, on the River Jordan and the Golan Heights. It had been a war fought to shatter the Arab aggression which had permanently plagued our lives, amounting latterly to boundless ferocity. It was the last, stern and fateful campaign in the war of nineteen years of belligerency waged by the Arab States against Israel from the first day of its establishment. The political and military preludes to the Six-Day War in the Arab camp are described elsewhere in this Year Book. By the morning of 5 June, then, Egypt had seven – including two armored – divisions in Sinai and the Gaza Strip. Jordan had seven infantry and two armored brigades, the infantry deployed along our border, the armor in the Jordan Valley. Egypt sent Jordan two commando battalions; Iraq moved a squadron to air-field No. 3 near its frontier with Jordan and began to maneuver infantry units in the interior. Syria marshaled its strength along our border: four infantry brigades there and two others holding a rearward second line; a spearhead of two armored and two mechanized brigades took post on the Golan Heights, and part of it was moved forward to the very boundary. In the air, according to published reports, the Arab States had between 600 and 700 aircraft, far more than Israel. Numerically, the Egyptian navy was many times © CIE 2014 www.israeled. superior to ours. The ‘defense’ pacts meant operational coordination between the Arab forces on all three fronts. The balance of power between Israel and its neighbors was gravely upset, the danger immediate. As the Egyptian forces moved northwards in Sinai, the Israel Defense Forces started to mobilize the Reserves, and the extent of call-up and readiness kept pace with every intensification of the Arab threat. On 5 June, the great charge of cumulative tension exploded thunderously. The Air Force From the first moment, the Air Force went into full action; its instantaneous and devastating strike on the enemy’s airfields has been mentioned. It achieved air mastery and kept it. Our pilots attacked enemy columns and emplacements on all fronts, transported our troops, did patrolling and communication fights, rescued comrades who bailed out behind the enemy lines, evacuated our wounded from the firing-line, and flew in and parachuted supplies. The ground-crews, in ceaseless and strenuous servicing, made it possible for our aircraft to take off safely again and again on their many missions: it was an unremitting discipline that added vastly to the effectiveness of the Air Force. Egypt, Syria and Jordan, with the two Iraqi squadrons, had 600 aircraft, 450 bombers and jet-fighters, the remainder transport planes and helicopters. On the first day, about 350 were destroyed on the ground and – a minority – in air fights. Egyptian airfields came under attack in Sinai and the Suez Canal zone, in the Delta and in the neighborhood of Cairo, right through to the Nile Valley, the shores of the Red Sea and up to the Sudan frontier; in Beni Suweif and Luxor long-range Topolev-16 bombers were the targets. It took a hundred and seventy minutes to write ‘finis’ to Egypt’s air power, infinitely less than our wildest optimism had envisaged; the destruction of 300 Egyptian aircraft grimly underlines what might have happened if these planes had been operable against our forces and our civilians. Among them 2343 30 Topolev-16 heavy bombers, 27 medium llyushin-28, 12 Sohoy-7 fighter-bombes, only just delivered, 90 Mig19 and 75 Mig17 fighters, and 32 transport planes and helicopters, including the large Mi-6 type. Jordan, Syria and Iraq had bombed Israel territory from the air on the first day. With Egypt now out of it, we turned to the airfields of Amman and Mafrak, of Damascus, Dameir, Seikal and Marj-Rail, and No. 3 in Iraq. Within an hour, all of Jordan’s 20 Hunter fighters, and its seven transport planes and helicopters had been dealt with; in Iraq, six Mig-21s and three Hunters; in Syria, 30 Mig-21s, 20 Mig-17s and two Llyushin- 28s, meaning two-thirds of its air force and the rest of it took off for airfields at a safe distance from our operational radius. The skies over the Golan Heights were in our undisputed control. After that, and even before it, two-thirds of the jet sorties were to aid our ground forces, in an ever-widening and more powerful cooperation of crucial importance on all fronts. © CIE 2014 www.israeled. It was not all attack. There was also transport, perhaps a prosaic way of describing the daring extrication of ‘downed’ pilots many kilometers behind the enemy lines rushing wounded from forward positions or parachuting men down into the heart of enemy emplacements in the midst of battle. All this by helicopter; transport planes carried reinforcements and supplies into battle areas. The strength of an air force is usually measured by the number of its planes. A better criterion is how many sorties it can carry out in a given time, which depends not only on the number of planes but also on the capability of ground crews. Our mechanics, armorers and fuelers worked round the clock, so that the planes could fly at top capacity, strike continuously at the enemy and sustain the sweep and élan of combat tot eh end. There never was a moment when our aircraft did not enjoy total serviceability. The citizens of Israel suffered almost no hurt from enemy air bombing; practically every enemy plane that entered our air space was shot down. The Navy The massive naval forces of the enemy never once took action, to disturb our sea- lanes, shell our coastal conurbations, or molest our forces from the rear. No commandos or saboteurs were landed behind our lines. Not one vessel of ours was hit. In the light of Egypt’s colossal buildup of naval strength with Soviet help, and of Israel’s geography, this was astounding. Israel’s little flotilla was not slow to attack, entering the enemy’s waters, beleaguering his ports and bases, penetrating his anchorages, inflicting damage on his ships. On the first night, in the harbor of Alexandria, several Egyptian vessels were hit; after midnight, an Israel destroyer and two torpedo-boats in the approaches of Port Said opened fire at a range of a thousand yards on two missile-carriers of Soviet make, scoring direct hits and forcing them to turn tall without even firing back. The navy, out of Eilat, took due part in the action that led to the capture of Sharm el-Sheikh. Land Battles The Southern Front The piercing of the forward defense positions in Sinai was carried through in a tri- axial offensive by task-force under Brigadiers Israel Tal, Erik Sharon and Abraham Yaffe, each made up of brigades of armor, infantry, parachutists, artillery, engineers and communications and medical units, plus a maintenance ancillary for duel, ammunition, repairs and supply, which permitted independent combat and movement over several successive days and nights. © CIE 2014 www.israeled. The break-through on the northern axis was by the Tal task-force, attacking in the Khan Yunis-Rafiah area, a two-brigaded position twelve kilometers deep with a strong protection of mines, tanks and anti-tank guns. The attack was mounted with great vigor by parachutists and armor, frontally and in a long flanking movement against the enemy’s southern element, and especially its artillery. Hard fighting went on for hours, but, even before the day was won, we had exploited the first gap to pass through a tank formation which burst out westward, overcame enemy positions at Sheikh Zueid and el-Jiradi and by nightfall had reached el-Arish.
Recommended publications
  • Israel-Hizbullah Conflict: Victims of Rocket Attacks and IDF Casualties July-Aug 2006
    My MFA MFA Terrorism Terror from Lebanon Israel-Hizbullah conflict: Victims of rocket attacks and IDF casualties July-Aug 2006 Search Israel-Hizbullah conflict: Victims of rocket E-mail to a friend attacks and IDF casualties Print the article 12 Jul 2006 Add to my bookmarks July-August 2006 Since July 12, 43 Israeli civilians and 118 IDF soldiers have See also MFA newsletter been killed. Hizbullah attacks northern Israel and Israel's response About the Ministry (Note: The figure for civilians includes four who died of heart attacks during rocket attacks.) MFA events Foreign Relations Facts About Israel July 12, 2006 Government - Killed in IDF patrol jeeps: Jerusalem-Capital Sgt.-Maj.(res.) Eyal Benin, 22, of Beersheba Treaties Sgt.-Maj.(res.) Shani Turgeman, 24, of Beit Shean History of Israel Sgt.-Maj. Wassim Nazal, 26, of Yanuah Peace Process - Tank crew hit by mine in Lebanon: Terrorism St.-Sgt. Alexei Kushnirski, 21, of Nes Ziona Anti-Semitism/Holocaust St.-Sgt. Yaniv Bar-on, 20, of Maccabim Israel beyond politics Sgt. Gadi Mosayev, 20, of Akko Sgt. Shlomi Yirmiyahu, 20, of Rishon Lezion Int'l development MFA Publications - Killed trying to retrieve tank crew: Our Bookmarks Sgt. Nimrod Cohen, 19, of Mitzpe Shalem News Archive MFA Library Eyal Benin Shani Turgeman Wassim Nazal Nimrod Cohen Alexei Kushnirski Yaniv Bar-on Gadi Mosayev Shlomi Yirmiyahu July 13, 2006 Two Israelis were killed by Katyusha rockets fired by Hizbullah: Monica Seidman (Lehrer), 40, of Nahariya was killed in her home; Nitzo Rubin, 33, of Safed, was killed while on his way to visit his children.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of the Second Lebanon War and Operation CAST LEAD
    BACK TO BASICS A Study of the Second Lebanon War and Operation CAST LEAD Lieutenant Colonel Scott C. Farquhar General Editor Combat Studies Institute Press US Army Combined Arms Center Fort Leavenworth, Kansas Form Approved Report Documentation Page OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE 3. DATES COVERED 2. REPORT TYPE 2009 00-00-2009 to 00-00-2009 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER Back to Basics. A Study of the Second Lebanon War and Operation 5b. GRANT NUMBER CAST LEAD 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION US Army Combined Arms Center,Combat Studies Institute,Fort REPORT NUMBER Leavenworth,KS,66027 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) 11.
    [Show full text]
  • The Israeli Experience in Lebanon, 1982-1985
    THE ISRAELI EXPERIENCE IN LEBANON, 1982-1985 Major George C. Solley Marine Corps Command and Staff College Marine Corps Development and Education Command Quantico, Virginia 10 May 1987 ABSTRACT Author: Solley, George C., Major, USMC Title: Israel's Lebanon War, 1982-1985 Date: 16 February 1987 On 6 June 1982, the armed forces of Israel invaded Lebanon in a campaign which, although initially perceived as limited in purpose, scope, and duration, would become the longest and most controversial military action in Israel's history. Operation Peace for Galilee was launched to meet five national strategy goals: (1) eliminate the PLO threat to Israel's northern border; (2) destroy the PLO infrastructure in Lebanon; (3) remove Syrian military presence in the Bekaa Valley and reduce its influence in Lebanon; (4) create a stable Lebanese government; and (5) therefore strengthen Israel's position in the West Bank. This study examines Israel's experience in Lebanon from the growth of a significant PLO threat during the 1970's to the present, concentrating on the events from the initial Israeli invasion in June 1982 to the completion of the withdrawal in June 1985. In doing so, the study pays particular attention to three aspects of the war: military operations, strategic goals, and overall results. The examination of the Lebanon War lends itself to division into three parts. Part One recounts the background necessary for an understanding of the war's context -- the growth of PLO power in Lebanon, the internal power struggle in Lebanon during the long and continuing civil war, and Israeli involvement in Lebanon prior to 1982.
    [Show full text]
  • British Army and Palestine Police Deserters and the Arab–Israeli War
    This is a repository copy of British Army and Palestine Police Deserters and the Arab– Israeli War of 1948. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/135106/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Caden, C and Arielli, N (2021) British Army and Palestine Police Deserters and the Arab– Israeli War of 1948. War in History, 28 (1). pp. 200-222. ISSN 0968-3445 https://doi.org/10.1177/0968344518796688 This is an author produced version of a paper accepted for publication in War in History. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ 1 British Army and Palestine Police Deserters and the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 British servicemen and policemen who had been stationed in Palestine towards the end of the British Mandate and deserted their units to serve with either Jewish or Arab forces have only received cursory academic attention.1 Yet, this is a relatively unique occurrence, in the sense that in no other British withdrawal from colonial territories did members from the security forces desert in notable numbers to remain in the territory to partake in hostilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Report
    A LICENSE TO KILL Israeli Operations against "Wanted" and Masked Palestinians A Middle East Watch Report Human Rights Watch New York !!! Washington !!! Los Angeles !!! London Copyright 8 July 1993 by Human Rights Watch. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Library of Congress Card Catalog Number: 93-79007 ISBN: 1-56432-109-6 Middle East Watch Middle East Watch was founded in 1989 to establish and promote observance of internationally recognized human rights in the Middle East. The chair of Middle East Watch is Gary Sick and the vice chairs are Lisa Anderson and Bruce Rabb. Andrew Whitley is the executive director; Eric Goldstein is the research director; Virginia N. Sherry and Aziz Abu Hamad are associate directors; Suzanne Howard is the associate. HUMAHUMAHUMANHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH Human Rights Watch conducts regular, systematic investigations of human rights abuses in some sixty countries around the world. It addresses the human rights practices of governments of all political stripes, of all geopolitical alignments, and of all ethnic and religious persuasions. In internal wars it documents violations by both governments and rebel groups. Human Rights Watch defends freedom of thought and expression, due process of law and equal protection of the law; it documents and denounces murders, disappearances, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, exile, censorship and other abuses of internationally recognized human rights. Human Rights Watch began in 1978 with the founding of Helsinki Watch by a group of publishers, lawyers and other activists and now maintains offices in New York, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, London, Moscow, Belgrade, Zagreb and Hong Kong.
    [Show full text]
  • The Six-Day War: Israel's Strategy and the Role of Air Power
    The Six-Day War: Israel’s Strategy and the Role of Air Power Dr Michael Raska Research Fellow Military Transformations Program [email protected] Ponder the Improbable Outline: • Israel’s Traditional Security Concept 1948 – 1967 – 1973 • The Origins of the Conflict & Path to War International – Regional – Domestic Context • The War: June 5-10, 1967 • Conclusion: Strategic Implications and Enduring Legacy Ponder the Improbable Israel’s Traditional Security Concept 1948 – 1967 – 1973 תפישת הביטחון של ישראל Ponder the Improbable Baseline Assumptions: Security Conceptions Distinct set of generally shared organizing ideas concerning a given state’s national security problems, reflected in the thinking of the country’s political and military elite; Threat Operational Perceptions Experience Security Policy Defense Strategy Defense Management Military Doctrine Strategies & Tactics Political and military-oriented Force Structure Operational concepts and collection of means and ends Force Deployment fundamental principles by through which a state defines which military forces guide their and attempts to achieve its actions in support of objectives; national security; Ponder the Improbable Baseline Assumptions: Israel is engaged in a struggle for its very survival - Israel is in a perpetual state of “dormant war” even when no active hostilities exist; Given conditions of geostrategic inferiority, Israel cannot achieve complete strategic victory neither by unilaterally imposing peace or by military means alone; “Over the years it has become clear
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise and Fall of the All-Palestine Government in Gaza
    The Rise and Fall of the All Palestine Government in Gaza Avi Shlaim* The All-Palestine Government established in Gaza in September 1948 was short-lived and ill-starred, but it constituted one of the more interest- ing and instructive political experiments in the history of the Palestinian national movement. Any proposal for an independent Palestinian state inevitably raises questions about the form of the government that such a state would have. In this respect, the All-Palestine Government is not simply a historical curiosity, but a subject of considerable and enduring political relevance insofar as it highlights some of the basic dilemmas of Palestinian nationalism and above all the question of dependence on the Arab states. The Arab League and the Palestine Question In the aftermath of World War II, when the struggle for Palestine was approaching its climax, the Palestinians were in a weak and vulnerable position. Their weakness was clearly reflected in their dependence on the Arab states and on the recently-founded Arab League. Thus, when the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) was reestablished in 1946 after a nine- year hiatus, it was not by the various Palestinian political parties them- selves, as had been the case when it was founded in 1936, but by a deci- sion of the Arab League. Internally divided, with few political assets of its *Avi Shlaim is the Alastair Buchan Reader in International Relations at Oxford University and a Professorial Fellow of St. Antony's College. He is author of Collusion Across the Jordan: King Abdullah the Zionist Movement and the Partition of Palestine (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988).
    [Show full text]
  • Persia & Iraq Command History & Personnel
    2020 www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk Author: Robert PALMER, M.A. PERSIA & IRAQ COMMAND (HISTORY & PERSONNEL) A short history of the Persia and Iraq Command (also known as ‘PaiForce’), an operational command in the British Army between ??. In addition, known details of the key appointments held between 1930 and 1950 are included. Copyright ©www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk (2020) 31 July 2020 [PERSIA & IRAQ COMMAND HISTORY & PERSONNEL] A Concise History of Persia & Iraq Command Version: 2_1 This edition dated: 5 August 2020 ISBN: Not yet allocated. All rights reserved. No part of the publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means including; electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, scanning without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Author: Robert PALMER, M.A. (copyright held by author) Assisted by: Stephen HEAL Published privately by: The Author – Publishing as: www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk ©www.BritishMilitaryH istory.co.uk Page 1 31 July 2020 [PERSIA & IRAQ COMMAND HISTORY & PERSONNEL] Persia and Iraq Command Modern Iraq is a country born out the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire following the defeat of Turkey at the end of the Great War. A government for the new state of Iraq was formed in November 1920, with Emir Feisal being proclaimed King of Iraq on 23 August 1921. The United Kingdom signed a treaty with Iraq in October 1922 defining the relationship between the two sovereign states. This treaty imposed limits on the sovereignty of Iraq and maintained British interests in the country. In 1925, the area around Mosul, which was rich in oil deposits, was ceded to Iraq from Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • THE NEXT WAR: How Another Conflict Between Hizballah and Israel Could Look and How Both Sides Are Preparing for It
    ANALYSIS PAPER Number 24, August 2011 THE NEXT WAR: How Another Conflict between Hizballah and Israel Could Look and How Both Sides are Preparing for It Bilal Y. Saab Nicholas Blanford The Brookings Institution is a private non-profit organization. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its management, or its other scholars. Copyright © 2011 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 www.brookings.edu ANALYSIS PAPER Number 24, August 2011 THE NEXT WAR: How Another Conflict between Hizballah and Israel Could Look and How Both Sides are Preparing for It Bilal Y. Saab Nicholas Blanford Table of Contents Executive Summary . iii Acknowledgements . vi The Authors . vii Introduction . 1 Potential Return to Arms . 3 Hizballah Prepares for War . 6 Israel Prepares for War . 14 Conclusion . 20 THE NEXT WAR The Saban Center at BROOKINGS ii Executive Summary ebanon and Israel have enjoyed a rare calm waged between them, and both sides have been in the five years since the August 14, 2006 feverishly preparing for the next war ever since the ceasefire that brought an end to that sum- last one ended. Lmer’s month-long war, the fiercest ever action waged between Hizballah and the Israel Defense Hizballah’s Posture Forces (IDF). Since the end of the 2006 war, Hizballah has under- Both sides drew sharp lessons from the 2006 conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • About the War of Independence
    About the War of Independence Israel's War of Independence is the first war between the State of Israel and the neighboring Arab countries. It started on the eve of the establishment of the state (May 14, 1948) and continued until January 1949. The war broke out following the rejection of the United Nation's Partition Plan, Resolution 181 of the General Assembly (November 29, 1947), by the Arab states and the Arab Higher Committee. The representatives of the Arab states threatened to use force in order to prevent the implementation of the resolution. Stage 1: November 29, 1947 - March 31, 1948 Arab violence erupted the day after the ratification of Resolution 181. Shots were fired on a Jewish bus close to Lod airport, and a general strike declared by the Arab Higher Committee resulted in the setting fire and the plundering of the Jewish commercial district near the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem. There were still 100,000 British troops stationed in Palestine, which were much stronger than both Arab and Israeli forces. Nevertheless, the British policy was not to intervene in the warfare between the two sides, except in order to safeguard the security of British forces and facilities. During this period, Arab military activities consisted of sniping and the hurling of bombs at Jewish transportation along main traffic arteries to isolated Jewish neighborhoods in ethnically mixed cites and at distant settlements. The Hagana, the military arm of the organized Yishuv, (the Jewish community of Palestine) put precedence on defensive means at first, while being careful to restrict itself to acts of retaliation against perpetrators directly responsible for the attacks.
    [Show full text]
  • 1948 Arab‒Israeli
    1948 Arab–Israeli War 1 1948 Arab–Israeli War מלחמת or מלחמת העצמאות :The 1948 Arab–Israeli War, known to Israelis as the War of Independence (Hebrew ,מלחמת השחרור :, Milkhemet Ha'atzma'ut or Milkhemet HA'sikhror) or War of Liberation (Hebrewהשחרור Milkhemet Hashikhrur) – was the first in a series of wars fought between the State of Israel and its Arab neighbours in the continuing Arab-Israeli conflict. The war commenced upon the termination of the British Mandate of Palestine and the Israeli declaration of independence on 15 May 1948, following a period of civil war in 1947–1948. The fighting took place mostly on the former territory of the British Mandate and for a short time also in the Sinai Peninsula and southern Lebanon.[1] ., al-Nakba) occurred amidst this warﺍﻟﻨﻜﺒﺔ :Much of what Arabs refer to as The Catastrophe (Arabic The war concluded with the 1949 Armistice Agreements. Background Following World War II, on May 14, 1948, the British Mandate of Palestine came to an end. The surrounding Arab nations were also emerging from colonial rule. Transjordan, under the Hashemite ruler Abdullah I, gained independence from Britain in 1946 and was called Jordan, but it remained under heavy British influence. Egypt, while nominally independent, signed the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936 that included provisions by which Britain would maintain a garrison of troops on the Suez Canal. From 1945 on, Egypt attempted to renegotiate the terms of this treaty, which was viewed as a humiliating vestige of colonialism. Lebanon became an independent state in 1943, but French troops would not withdraw until 1946, the same year that Syria won its independence from France.
    [Show full text]
  • The Baghdad Set
    The Baghdad Set Also by Adrian O’Sullivan: Nazi Secret Warfare in Occupied Persia (Iran): The Failure of the German Intelligence Services, 1939–45 (Palgrave, 2014) Espionage and Counterintelligence in Occupied Persia (Iran): The Success of the Allied Secret Services, 1941–45 (Palgrave, 2015) Adrian O’Sullivan The Baghdad Set Iraq through the Eyes of British Intelligence, 1941–45 Adrian O’Sullivan West Vancouver, BC, Canada ISBN 978-3-030-15182-9 ISBN 978-3-030-15183-6 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15183-6 Library of Congress Control Number: 2019934733 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub- lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]